Comprehension Program Scientific Research Base

Reading Eggspress Comprehension Program
Scientific Research Base November, 2014
By amy russo
With Katy Pike
reading Eggspress comprehension Scientific Research Base November 2014
1
Reading Eggspress comprehension Program
Scientific Research Base November, 2014
“Research demonstrates that when primary grade students receive optimal comprehension
instruction, their performances on measures of literal, inferential, and metacognitive
comprehension increase, as do their vocabulary; decoding, problem-solving, and cooperative
learning skills; and self-esteem.” (Ness, 2011, p. 99)
Considering the inherent complexities involved, learning
how to read high level, complex texts is an extraordinary
achievement (Connor, Phillips, Kaschak, Apel, Kim, Al
Otaiba, Crowe, Thomas-Tate, Johnson, Lonigan, 2014;
Ricketts, Cocksey & Nation, 2011; Nation, 2009). A good
reader is someone who actively reads and predicts what
will happen next. These readers construct, revise and
question as they read (Duke & Pearson, 2002). They
develop understanding through higher-order thinking as
they decode words, apply meanings and interpret the
differing structures of a text (Nation, 2009).
As understanding is the ultimate goal for reading, teachers
need to find effective ways of teaching comprehension.
This requires a balance of direct instruction and time
spent reading quality texts for students to put into practice
predicting, summarising and questioning (Duke & Pearson,
2002). The Reading Eggspress Comprehension
program combines best practice through a balance
of direct instruction and a range of engaging activities
for students to independently apply new knowledge
in meaningful ways. An integral part of classrooms in
the 21st century is computer technology with research
showing how purposeful computer-based tasks can
help teachers in diverse classrooms achieve improved
reading outcomes (Kamil & Chou, 2009; Lysenko &
Abrami, 2014; Ponce, López & Mayer, 2012; Slavin, Lake,
Chambers, Cheung, Davis, 2009). This wide research base
was central in informing the use of adaptive computer
components to help teachers individualise instruction.
Process of comprehension
Decoding and comprehension are different
skills
Evidence from educational linguists supports the
theory that the decoding element of reading requires
different linguistic and cognitive abilities to those used to
comprehend texts (Gough & Turner, 1986; Muter, Hulme,
Snowling & Stevenson, 2004; Ricketts et al., 2011).
Decoding is dependent on the quality of phonological
skills to assist with word recognition (Muter et al., 2004)
whereas understanding is built upon the interaction
of cognitive, metacognitive and motivational variables
(Dignath & Büttner, 2008). Recognising the role of these
variables, the Reading Eggspress Comprehension
program makes the cognitive and metacognitive skills
required for comprehension explicit to learners.
Reading strategies & Reading skills
With the goal of deep understanding of texts read,
research supports explicit teaching of deliberate reading
strategies to enable fluent reading skills (Afflerbach,
Pearson & Paris, 2008; Atkins, 2013; Conor et al., 2014;
Reutzel, Child, Jones, Clark, 2014). Explicit instruction
requires explanation of the mental processes to help
students “think their way through texts” (Duffy, 2009,
p.45). Afflerbach and peers (2008) outline the differences
between reading comprehension strategies and reading
skills. The difference can be seen as a process of
transition of cognitive effort from deliberate structured
learning to automatic usage. Reading strategies are
deliberate, conscious, metacognitive acts that once used
automatically with fluency become an embedded part of
an individual’s reading skills. The fundamental aim for
students progressing through the increasingly complex
texts in the Reading Eggspress Comprehension
program is to gain fluency to transform strategies into
reading skills. To enable this, the program offers multiple
opportunities for students to independently put into
practice the strategies they are taught. Designed as an
adaptive computer program, students implement each
strategy multiple times with different texts. They are also
able to play through these activities multiple times to help
them gain fluency and deeper understanding of text.
Building comprehension
Reading comprehension & vocabulary
Research suggests an inextricable link between
reading comprehension and vocabulary (Beck, Perfetti
reading Eggspress comprehension Scientific Research Base November 2014
2
& McKeown, 1982; Duke & Pearson, 2002; Graves,
2000). The explicit instruction of new vocabulary words
in the research conducted by Beck and her peers was
shown to produce students that could perform better on
comprehension based tasks (Beck et al., 1982). Graves
(2000) advocates for extensive reading coupled with
the explicit teaching of strategies with targeted words
to maximise success. The implication is for teachers to
use this knowledge to partner reading comprehension
instruction with vocabulary programs that enable students
to acquire new word meanings for reciprocal benefits in
both areas. The pre-reading activities in the Reading
Eggspress Comprehension program include many
activities that focus on building word knowledge and
increasing vocabulary knowledge. This increase in word
knowledge and their meanings will in turn assist them to
make gains in reading comprehension.
exploratory study of text and enable guided practice. This
enables the gradual transfer of responsibility to students
as they put skills into practice in meaningful applications.
At the core is the text as the focus, with the outcome to
critically and methodically unpack text to enable deep
understanding.
Models of comprehension
The role of literal comprehension is to extract information
that is explicitly stated in a text (Carnine, Silbert,
Kame’enui, & Tarver, 2010). As it requires students to
look for information that is explicitly outlined in a text, the
cognitive load is quite low (Basaraba, Yovanoff, Alonzo
& Tindal, 2013). The fluency of these literal reading
strategies into skills builds the foundation for the teaching
of inferential and critical reading strategies (Kintsch &
Rawson, 2005; Nation, 2005). In understanding the
importance of this research the Reading Eggspress
Comprehension program has structured many literal
comprehension strategies in the early stages of the
program. Explicit teaching and repetition is designed to
craft a solid base from which more complex strategies can
be built upon.
Educators face the challenge of building programs that
are tailored to the reading comprehension level of each
student. Duke & Pearson (2002) showed the success
of these programs relies on five elements to support
students to become effective readers. The elements are:
·
·
·
·
·
explicit teaching of reading strategies;
modelling strategies in action;
collaborative strategy implementation;
guided practice and transfer of responsibility to
students;
independent use of the strategy.
Close reading is an instructional method that has emerged
in recent research as a tool for younger students to
help them critically examine texts (Fisher & Frey, 2012;
Fisher & Frey, 2014b). Using close reading helps students
evaluate text in a thorough and methodical way (Beers &
Probst, 2013). The features of close reading are:
·
·
·
·
short passages where the focus is intense;
complex texts that require repeated readings;
text focused exploratory study;
text-dependent questions.
Both of these pedagogical examples of best practice
have been integrated to produce a robust and rigorous
design to benefit students in the Reading Eggspress
Comprehension program. Explicit direct instruction of
strategies is employed with short focused texts. Strategies
are modelled and a range of tools used to lead the
Levels of comprehension
The Reading Eggspress Comprehension program
draws upon three comprehension types – literal,
inferential, and critical. It builds and assesses these using
content appropriate grade level texts with increasingly
complex texts and questions that challenge students to
read closely. Strategies for each level of comprehension
are explicitly taught to create a solid foundation for
students to draw from as they move to independently
comprehending more complex texts.
Inferential and critical reading strategies demand more
from the reader as they require more complex levels
of understanding. Inferential comprehension entails
students to look at information in a text and search for the
relationships and details to find connections (Basaraba
et al., 2013; Carnine et al., 2010). Critical understanding
looks at extending the strategies of inferential
understanding to evaluate texts using divergent thinking,
critical analysis, synthesis, and evaluation (Vacca, Vacca,
Gove, Burkey, Lenhart, & McKeon, 2009). These more
complex strategies are gradually introduced into the
Reading Eggspress Comprehension program so that
students build deeper understanding, make connections
and explore more rigorous readings of texts.
reading Eggspress comprehension Scientific Research Base November 2014
3
Literature and nonfiction texts
A balance between literature and nonfiction texts is crucial
for a rich language program. Research acknowledges that
literature and nonfiction texts have different purposes,
structures and therefore require different skills for
reading comprehension (Best, Floyd, McNamara, 2008;
Eason, Goldberg, Young, Geist, Cutting, 2012). The
findings of Eason and her peers revealed that children’s
comprehension is not identical across all types of text
and question types. Teachers need a clear picture of how
children comprehend texts across text type, genre and
subject area. They also need to know how their students’
are responding to different question types. In the
Reading Eggspress Comprehension program each
of the My Lessons map of five lessons is focused on either
all nonfiction text samples or all literature text samples.
Teachers can view a breakdown to see how students
perform in each area and across different question types
in the detailed reports.
Each of the My Lessons maps also includes a focus text,
a complete text that students read in its entirety. These
inform the artwork of the map and provide a contextualised
reading of extended text. These e-books are included to
help build students’ reading fluency, increase the total
number of words they read and improve motivation. When
used in a classroom setting, these e-books also become
part of the shared experience of a group of students, as
books that are read and enjoyed at the same time. Reading
and discussing books, stories and ideas with peers,
teachers and other students is one of the most enjoyable
facets of reading for pleasure, thus increasing reading
enjoyment and improving students’ motivation to read.
Complexity
Measuring text complexity or readability is not a new idea
with estimations that since the 1920s more than 100
readability formulas have been researched, constructed
and implemented in school reading programs (Gunning,
2003). In recent years there has been a focus on a select
few readability formulas. Fisher & Frey (2014a; 2014b)
explain the strengths of these quantitative measures to
inform decision-making. They stress alongside readability,
the content needs to be age-appropriate, interesting and
relevant. Finding the right balance can be challenging to
align all of these elements.
The Reading Eggspress Comprehension program
uses the Lexile measure, a framework created by
MetaMetrics to facilitate a common scale and metric
for measuring reading ability and readability of text
(Harvey, 2011). It is one of the most common quantitative
measures used for text complexity (Fisher & Frey,
2014b) with millions of published books now including
a Lexile level. Each text in the Reading Eggspress
Comprehension program has been independently
measured using the quantitative measure of Lexile and
then assigned an appropriate Reading Eggs Reading
Level by a panel of literacy consultants. This Reading Eggs
Reading Level also takes into consideration qualitative
measures such as age appropriateness and content. The
Lexile framework ensures the consistent gradual increase
in text complexity within the Reading Eggspress
Comprehension program. Using a validated
independent model of measurement for text complexity
provides comparable data sets for the gains shown within
the program. This also means that finding additional
reading materials at the right level within the Reading
Eggspress Library is easy to do, as all Reading Eggspress
Library Books include a Lexile level.
Comprehension components
Explicit
Torgesen (2004) described explicit instruction as
“instruction that does not leave anything to chance
and does not make assumptions about skills and
knowledge that children will acquire on their own” (p.363).
The challenges teachers face in trying to implement
comprehension strategies is well-documented, as the
area is complex and requires detailed planning and
large quantities of time (van Keer, 2004; Ness, 2011).
Results from these studies highlight the complex and time
consuming role reading comprehension instruction poses
in the planning, assessment and reteaching required.
Technology
Classrooms are investing more in technology and
emerging pedagogical research supports the role
of computer technology in aiding comprehension
development (Lysenko & Abrami, 2014; Ponce et al.;
2012). There is evidence that using a computer-based
strategy instruction with elementary school students
adds value beyond the limits of traditional classroom
practice (Ponce et al., 2012, p.1182). Targeted computer
technology can also help teachers use their time more
purposefully (Lysenko & Abrami, 2014).
reading Eggspress comprehension Scientific Research Base November 2014
4
Metacognition
For students to transfer comprehension skills, teaching
the why and when for strategies is as important as the
how. This metacognitive thinking needs to be activated to
enable the transfer of skills from one text to many others.
Equipping students in this way helps them view these
strategies as tools to assist with meaning construction,
as opposed to tasks completed at a teacher’s request
(Gersten, Fuchs, Williams, & Baker, 2001; Hollenbeck
& Saternus, 2013). Without careful instruction on why
and when to apply strategies, students find it difficult to
generalise what they have learned in tasks to new tasks
beyond comprehension training exercises (Atkins, 2013).
The Reading Eggspress Comprehension program
uses a range of teaching videos that explicitly model a
specific strategy. Students then practise and implement
these skills in short interactive activities that reinforce the
active use of a specific strategy. These strategy videos
and skill building activities build upon one another and
give students insight into the processes comprehension
experts undergo when they approach reading a new text.
As strategies are transformed into fluent skills, more
challenging texts are introduced in the program in line with
current research on extending comprehension knowledge
(Afflerbach, et al., 2008). This research also suggests
revisiting key strategies as their scope and complexity
allows them to be retaught for extra depth.
The Reading Eggspress Comprehension program
focuses on literal, inferential and critical reading
comprehension questions for skill building and
metacognitive understanding. The program centres on
questions that address key areas in comprehension main idea and details; compare and contrast; making
connections; sequencing events; cause and effect;
understanding character; drawing conclusions; predicting;
summarising; fact and opinion; point of view; and word
study. Each skill is repeated many times to build each
student’s ability to transfer these skills and for them to
become an integral part of their repertoire of their reading
comprehension skills.
Motivation
Reading comprehension is influenced by a range of
factors affecting students’ motivation to reading (Guthrie,
Hoa, Wigfield, Tonks, Humenick, & Littles, 2007; Miller &
Faircloth, 2009). In the work of Guthrie and his colleagues,
they discovered students outlined being knowledgeable as
an explicit goal of reading (2007). The research highlights
the power of this goal for motivation and the Reading
Eggspress Comprehension program explains the
metacognitive strategies to students to ensure they feel
knowledgeable in their reading.
An additional factor in motivation is interest in a text’s
content which is associated with high cognitive recall
and comprehension of text (Guthrie et al., 2007). Where
students are interested and engaged they are more likely
to have higher cognitive recall. The Reading Eggspress
Comprehension program has curated texts across a
wide range of content and genres to ignite motivation for
the widest group possible.
Ongoing formative assessment
The purpose of meaningful classroom assessment is
to give teachers feedback about student performance
(Torgenssen & Miller, 2009). The Reading Eggspress
Comprehension Program integrates assessment into
every stage of the program. The end-of-lesson quizzes
provide important information about student progress
with reports showing a breakdown of student results to
different question types ranging from literal and inferential
to whole text responses. Every five lessons, students also
complete an assessment task that is in a similar format to
standardised national online tests. Each assessment task
is consistent across the 44 levels of the program and uses
a text with an independent Lexile level and 10 questions.
Using the results of these assessment tasks, teachers
can clearly see growth over time in their students’
reading comprehension of both literature and nonfiction
texts. Assessment reports show both Lexile growth
and improvements in students’ abilities to deepen their
comprehension abilities beyond the literal to access
deeper levels of meaning, make connections and use an
ever increasing vocabulary. As students progress through
the program they complete lessons with increasingly
complex texts and answer questions that require close
reading and deeper understanding. Using the results of
assessments teachers can redirect students to particular
lessons to build their knowledge of a comprehension
strategy. Teachers can also compare a student’s
proficiency in literature and nonfiction texts, as students
may have different abilities in each of these domains.
Ongoing assessment is a powerful tool for personalising
the teaching and learning cycle within a classroom.
reading Eggspress comprehension Scientific Research Base November 2014
5
Conclusion
There is a broad research base that supports the
explicit teaching of reading comprehension strategies to
improve student outcomes in the complex task of reading
comprehension. As students progress through primary
school and move beyond ‘learn to read’ to ‘read to learn’,
they encounter texts with ever increasing complexity. This
text complexity comes from a range of areas that include
thousands of new words across the different content
areas; understanding technical, scientific and historical
processes; to the challenging ideas found in literature
and poetry. Many students struggle with the increased
conceptual load and cognitive demands of these texts.
The Reading Eggspress Comprehension program
provides a comprehensive and systematic program
of comprehension strategy instruction that models,
scaffolds and supports student learning in an online
environment that is rewarding and motivational. With
technology usage growing in the classroom, studies show
that online software programs can benefit literacy skills
and that teachers need programs that can be tailored
to the individual needs of each student. The Reading
Eggspress Comprehension program effectively allows
teachers to assign lessons, monitor growth and assess
student progress for the many and varied needs of the
students within their classroom.
References
Afflerbach, P., Pearson, P.D., & Paris, S.G. (2008).
Clarifying differences between reading skills and reading
strategies. The Reading Teacher, 61, 5, 364–373.
Atkins, J. G. (2013). The effect of explicit teaching of
comprehension strategies on reading comprehension
in elementary school. Unpublished Ph.D., Columbia
University.
Basaraba, D., Yovanoff, P., Alonzo, J. & Tindal, G. (2013).
Examining the structure of reading comprehension: Do
literal, inferential, and evaluative comprehension truly
exist? Reading and Writing, 26, 3, 349-379.
Best, R. M., Floyd, R. G., & McNamara, D. S. (2008).
Differential competencies contributing to children’s
comprehension of narrative and expository texts. Reading
Psychology, 29, 137–164.
Carnine, D. W., Silbert, J., Kame’enui, E. J., & Tarver, S. G.
(2010). Direct instruction reading (5th ed.). Boston, MA:
Merrill.
Connor, C. M., Phillips, B. M., Kaschak, M., Apel, K., Kim,
Y., Al Otaiba, S., Crowe, E. C., Thomas-Tate, S., Johnson,
L. C., Lonigan, C. J. (2014). Comprehension tools for
teachers: Reading for understanding from prekindergarten
through fourth grade. Educational Psychology Review, 26,
379-401.
Dignath, C. & Büttner, G. (2008). Components of fostering
self-regulated learning among students: A meta-analysis
on intervention studies at primary and secondary school
level. Metacognition & Learning, 3, 231-264.
Duffy, G. G. (2009). Explaining reading: A resource for
teaching concepts, skills, and strategies (2nd ed.). New
York: Guilford Press.
Duke, N. K. & Pearson, P. D. (2002). Effective practices
for developing reading comprehension. In A. E. Farstrup &
Samuels S. J. (3rd Eds.) What Research Has to Say About
Reading Instruction. International Reading Association:
USA.
Eason, S. H., Goldberg, L. F., Young, K. M., Geist, M.
C., Cutting, L. E. (2012) Reader–text interactions: How
differential text and question types influence cognitive
skills needed for reading comprehension. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 104, 3, 515–528.
Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2012). Close reading in elementary
schools. The Reading Teacher, 66, 179-188.
Fisher, D. & Frey, N. (2014a). Addressing CCSS anchor
standard 10: Text complexity. Language Arts, 91, 4, 236250.
Fisher, D. & Frey, N. (2014b) Understanding and teaching
complex texts. Childhood Education, 90, 4, 306-313.
Beck, I. L., Perfetti, C. A., & McKeown, M. G. (1982).
The effects of long-term vocabulary instruction on
lexical access and reading comprehension. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 74, 506-521.
Gersten, R., Fuchs, L. S., Williams, J. P., & Baker, S. (2001).
Teaching reading comprehension strategies to students
with learning disabilities: A review of research. Review of
Educational Research, 71, 2, 279-320.
Beers, K. & Probst, R. E. (2013). Notice & note: Strategies
for close reading. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Gough, P. B, & Tunmer, W. (1986). Decoding, reading and
reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7,
6–10.
reading Eggspress comprehension Scientific Research Base November 2014
6
Graves, M. F. (2000). A vocabulary program to complement
and bolster and middle-grade comprehension program.
In B. M. Taylor, M. F. Graves & P. van den Broek (Eds.),
Reading for meaning: Fostering comprehension in the
middle grades (pp.116-135) Teachers College Press: New
York.
Nation, K. (2009). Reading comprehension and
vocabulary: What’s the connection? In R. K. Wagner,
C. Phythian-Sence, C. Schatschneider (Eds.), Beyond
Decoding: The Behavioral and Biological Foundations of
Reading Comprehension (pp. 176-194). New York: Guilford
Press.
Gunning, T. G. (2003). The role of readability in today’s
classrooms. Topics in Language Disorders, 23, 175–189.
Nation, K. (2005). Children’s reading comprehension
difficulties. In M. J. Snowling & C. Hulme (Eds.), The
science of reading: A handbook (pp. 248–265). Oxford,
MA: Blackwell.
Guthrie, J. T., Hoa, A. L. W., Wigfield, A., Tonks, S. M.,
Humenick, N. M., & Littles, E. (2007). Reading motivation
and reading comprehension growth in the later elementary
years. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32, 282–
313.
Harvey, C. A. (2011). An inside view of Lexile measures:
An interview with Malbert Smith III. Knowledge Quest:
Reversing Readericide, 39, 4, 56-59.
Hollenbeck, A. F. & Saternus, K. (2013). Mind the
comprehension iceberg: Avoiding titanic mistakes with the
CCSS. The Reading Teacher, 66, 7, 558–568.
Kamil, M. L., & Chou, H. K. (2009). Comprehension and
technology. In S.E. Israel & G. G. Duffy (Eds.), Handbook
of research on reading comprehension (pp. 289-304).
Manwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
van Keer, H. (2004). Fostering reading comprehension
in the fifth grade by explicit instruction in reading
strategies and peer tutoring. British Journal of Educational
Psychology, 74, 37-70.
Kintsch, W., & Rawson, K. A. (2005). Comprehension. In
M. J. Snowling & C. Hulme (Eds.), The science of reading: A
handbook (pp. 209–226). Oxford, MA: Blackwell.
Lysenko, L. V. & Abrami, P. C. (2014). Promoting reading
comprehension with the use of technology. Computers &
Education, 75, 162-172.
Miller, S.D., & Faircloth, B.S. (2009). Motivation and
reading comprehension. In S.E. Israel & G.G. Duffy (Eds.),
Handbook of research on reading comprehension (pp.
307–322). New York: Routledge.
Muter, V., Hulme, C., Snowling, M. J. and Stevenson, J.
(2004). Phonemes, rimes, vocabulary, and grammatical
skills as foundations of early reading development:
Evidence from a longitudinal study, Developmental
Psychology, 40, 665-681.
Ness, M. (2011). Explicit reading comprehension
instruction in elementary classrooms: Teacher use of
reading comprehension strategies. Journal of Research in
Childhood Education, 25, 1, 98-117.
Ponce, H. R., López, M. J., Mayer, R. E. (2012).
Instructional effectiveness of a computer-supported
program for teaching reading comprehension strategies.
Computers & Education, 59, 1170-1183.
Reutzel, D. R., Child, A., Jones, C. D., Clark, S. K. (2014).
Explicit instruction in core reading programs. The
Elementary School Journal, 114, 3, 406-430.
Ricketts, J., Cocksey, J., Nation, K. (2011). Understanding
children’s reading comprehension difficulties. In S. Ellis
& E. McCartney (Eds.), Applied Linguistics and Primary
School Teaching (pp. 154-164). Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Slavin, R. E., Lake, C., Chambers, B., Cheung, A., Davis,
S. (2009). Effective reading programs for the elementary
grades: A best-evidence synthesis. Review of Educational
Research, 79, 1391- 1466.
Torgesen, J. K. (2004). Lessons learned from research
on interventions for students who have difficulty learning
to read. In P. McCardle & V. Chhabra (Eds.), The Voice of
Evidence in Reading Research (pp. 355–382). Baltimore:
Brookes.
Torgesen, J. K., & Miller, D. H. (2009). Assessments to
guide adolescent literacy instruction. Portsmouth: RMC
Research Corporation, Center on Instruction.
Vacca, J. L., Vacca, R. T., Gove, M. K., Burkey, L. C.,
Lenhart, L. A., & McKeon, C. A. (2009). Reading and
learning to read (7th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
reading Eggspress comprehension Scientific Research Base November 2014
7